Doing Wrong Thing Better

By Carol Crossed

Because I have been a contributor to the Democratic Party for all
of my adult life, I receive one or two pieces of fund-raising
literature a day from Hillary Clinton and James Carville, from Tom
Daschle and Ted Kennedy, from John Kerry's campaign and the DNC. This
mail, with few exceptions promote the party's support for "choice."
Never mind that we can't bring ourselves to say what the choice is we
are supporting.

The question is will the Democratic Party learn from its 2000 and
2002 losses or continue to support unrestricted abortion rights?

Since 1993 only seven states, plus the District of Columbia, have
seen growth in the number of people who identify themselves as
Democrats. By contrast, 41 states have seen Republican gains (Gallup
2003). Yet despite increasing support for restrictions on abortion,
the Democratic Party continues to advocate for an increasingly
smaller minority who favor abortion on demand, no matter what the
circumstance.

We can safely say that when somebody is for something no matter
what the circumstance, this can be called an "extremist position."
And no matter how conflicted the public is on Roe v. Wade, they are
not conflicted over wanting to go beyond that. Measures that are
allowed under the constitution, like parental consent, women's
right-to-know legislation, clinic regulations, are aggressively
opposed by Planned Parenthood and their Democratic state and
congressional lackeys. And in January of this year, Kate Michelman
with Democratic leaders in tow, even announced a bill that would
invalidate state and federal regulations on abortion, restrictions
that are allowed under the Constitution.

A 2003 poll sponsored by EMILY's List, the pro-choice PAC for
Democratic women candidates, revealed that women are almost as likely
to back President Bush as they are one of the Democratic presidential
candidates. This is a far cry from 1996, when Bill Clinton defeated
Bob Dole by 16 percentage points among women voters.

In addition to women, other major Democratic constituent groups
support abortion restrictions. Sixty-two percent of African-Americans
and 78% of Hispanics back greater restrictions, as do 65% of people
making less than $20,000 (Gallup 2002, Zogby 2003). Although it may
not be surprising that, according to a Zogby Poll released in January
2004, 68% of Republicans believe abortion is "manslaughter." But what
is surprising is that 43% of Democrats agreed.

Despite enormous amounts of money being poured into pro-choice
PACs, for example EMILY's List with $33 million, we Democrats still
didn't win in 2002. Instead of money going toward showcasing our
party's candidates positions for universal health care, for peaceful
solutions to the Iraq war, or for safeguarding the environment, we
consume millions of dollars promoting the abortion "choice." The
party's plank of "the right to choose" has really become our "right
to lose."

But a bright yellow half-sheet in a recent piece of campaign
literature differed with me. It touted the special election win of
Ben Chandler in Kentucky as the sign of a Democratic Party comeback.
It has touted the win of Stephanie Herseth in South Dakota and the
nomination of Bill Gluba for Congress in Iowa. But one thing not
mentioned in the fine print, is that these candidates support
restrictions and regulations on abortion. Chandler and Gluba actually
ran and won on a pro-life plank.

Columnist Mark Shields put it this way: "What has to worry
Democrats, who for the first time in nearly 17 months see George
Bush's politically vulnerable, is that their potential nominee will
-- by compulsive constituency coddling of the variety shown at NARAL
-- forfeit any chance of winning in November 2004." (Rochester
Democrat and Chronicle, 1/25/2003)

Many grassroots Democrats want to prevent the Democratic Party
from doing the wrong thing better and to plug the hemorrhaging of
good people from the party. Nine states have started chapters of
Democrats for Life of America (DFLA). They are Massachusetts, Ohio,
California, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New York, Texas and
Florida. Twenty-three more states are in the process of forming
chapters.

Let's be honest. Winning can't be everything. For instance DFLA
also opposes capital punishment, even if we lose a few votes because
of it. But is standing for unrestricted abortion rights a principled
position? In the 1840s and '50s, Democrats were on the pro-choice
side of another greater moral issue of the day -- slavery. The
collective conscience of the people voted for Republican Abraham
Lincoln. This was a history lesson in the politics of pragmatics as
well as principle. With few exceptions, Democrats continued to lose
control of the White House and Congress until the election of
Roosevelt in 1932.

Since then we have proudly been the party with a more expansive
interpretation of human rights -- workers' rights, women's rights,
and the rights of the poor. It is a tragic irony that now the party
of the vulnerable supports the unrestricted destruction of another
vulnerable class of human beings.

The Palm Beach Post reported June 21 that Joy Hearn, candidate for
a Democratic property appraiser post in Florida was asked by
Democratic Party members to remove her "Choose Life" license plate
while she was running for office. This is the party of "the big
tent"? Is this the party of "tolerance" or a circular firing squad
reducing us to single-issue, litmus-test voters, something we have
called Republicans for years.

Meanwhile, the issues we Democrats care about will lose because
our candidates are going to lose. It's time we stood up to the
absolutist pro-choice special-interest groups and say "No thanks" to
their special interest money. It won't buy our consciences. It won't
even buy many elections.

Carol Crossed of Rochester, N.Y., is president of Democrats for
Life of America (democratsforlife.org); phone 703-281-3781; email
ccrossed@rochester.rr.com.